Moving Children’s Participation Forward Through Article 31 – the Right To Play
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article uses a rights-based and social ecological approach to explore the role of the right to play in the lives of children and youth, as outlined in Article 31 of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), in supporting the actualization of children’s meaningful participation, as outlined in Article 12 and as a guiding principle of the UNCRC. This article introduces the limited recognition of the value of play internationally, as emphasized in General Comment 17. It uses a rights-based approach to analyze the intrinsic and instrumental value of play as a right itself and its role in supporting children to actively participate as experts in their own lives, develop leadership skills, express their views, be listened to, and be active in decision-making processes. The authors will explore the positive contribution play can make to the healthy and holistic development of children and youth and how these skills support a sense of agency and leadership in children and youth at present and in their future. Right To Play’s methodological approach is grounded in participatory, experiential learning and the work of educationalists. This work will be showcased to highlight how play can strengthen children’s meaningful participation. The authors conclude that it is imperative that the international development and humanitarian community continues to strengthen the advocacy for and use of play to strengthen children’s wellbeing, healthy development and active participation in their lives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it